So in the end it would be about Phoenix no matter what. Though I can see Apollo trying to get his own name (so to speak) because of the case.

I don't know. I was thinking Apollo and Phoenix are seen arguing and Apollo says something that causes PW to disappear (something about his past?) and Apollo feels extremely guilty about it. Then Apollo discovers not only Phoenix's past but his own as well?

Still brainstorming. XD

So with that rumor of the 'crime lord'... it would be kind of like Daredevil and the Kingpin? The Kingpin organized all these murders and all the violent crime in the Kitchen, and Daredevil tracked him down and killed him. Huh, that would be quite interesting.

Also, to kill Phoenix... was I the only one who immediately thought of

Phoenix could do that, except maybe pull

I don't know, that idea seems overdone to me, it happened in TT and AJ, so...

---

You would think that they wouldn't rationally do something like that [dead!Phoenix, evil!Phoenix], due to lost fans and profits, but the direction they took with Phoenix in GS4 possibly didn't help [longer-term] profits and certainly split the fanbase - and they did it.

I hope he doesn't pull an Edgeworth and 'choose death' or disappear either. It would be too sad, and too much of a repeat of Edgeworth. Personally I would hate them pulling evil!Phoenix even more than dead!Phoenix.


I do wonder if the series is 'supposed' to be about Apollo Justice now. Sure game 4 ended up really being about Phoenix, but I think it was by accident more than intention. Thus I fear they may kill off Phoenix as a cheap ploy so they don't end up having the rest of 'Apollo's' arc revolve around Phoenix. Because remember the writers never wanted to bring Phoenix back, and probably resented doing so. I wish we could get some info on GS5 so we could see some kind of hint as to what direction it's taking *impatient*

---

If phoenix died, yes there would probably be a massive loss in fanbase, but I would still play. Its supposed to be about Apollo and no matter how much we love phoenix, we need to learn about Apollo now. I also heard a lot of people saying less of Phoenix in GS5. I do think he has gotten massively cooler, Apollo should experience an important loss, he needs to learn something Phoenix never did learn and that is dependence on others. Although Apollo seems like one to be more independent and Phoenix seemed more co-dependent, Apollo should realize the importance of a loss and how it can happen so quickly and cherish those around him. It could be valuable life experience to him.

I think the game should start out with phoenix's death, but you send an innocent person to prison, then the next turnabout begins 9 months before the first case. The middle cases (whether it be 2 or 3 turnabouts) explains how the death of phoenix became. in the Last turnabout, events transpire in which makes him look at the death of phoenix once more and finally catching the real killer.

The double jeopardy rule probably will have a significant effect in here and he'll have to figure a way around it, but... yeah... that would make this a truly emotional game. I also think it should completely focus on Phoenix, but also relate to Apollo's past and how it affected the death of phoenix. Someway and somehow...

---

Firstly, No to evil Phoenix,
No Way
Ever.
I prefer him to die than to be guilty.

Secondly, I think if somone like Nick or the Main prosecutor of GS5 died, that would make some interesting storyline.
Then again, Apollo may/will get horribly depressed about it.

However, it would teach him not to depend on Trucy/Klavier/Udgey etc for help, He may become slightly more independant and forceful in court.
This could also lead to Painful memories of Apollos past, such as, I don't know, his best friends death.
This could explain a lot more about Apollos past to us.

Finally,
If Nick doesn't die, I hope they do have a GS2-style farewell for Phoenix.

Assuming that is, he does indeed leave.

---

Klavier is murdered, and Apollo is framed for the murder! Yes!

What, GS2 style 'farewell'? Phoenix flying off on a plane to who knows where aka Franziska? And who will be the 'Edgeworth' in that conversation? [Or maybe you meant something else?]

---

Example,

Apollo, I can no longer stay in this country for <Reason XYZ... something may happen that leaves him as an open ended suspect still after case 5, meaning he must leave the country, or his reputation has been so badly damaged he must leave etc.>

But, Daddy, you can't leave me on my own again...

Trucy, (some rubbish about how he loves her) also, Apollo can take care of you now (shes 16, so that should be allowed) (OR, if they know about Lamiroir, then they can get her to take care of Trucy instead)

Apollo, I'm counting on you to pursue the truth....etc etc... I know you'll make a great lawyer someday...etc etc... take good care of Trucy.

But, Mr Wright, you can't leave me, I need your help,



Apollo, you proved to the entire world a few days ago what you were capable of, You have long surpassed me in the field of law...

then some more reminiscing between them, then they all say farewell etc, Phoenix promises to write to them,

Then you see a pic of the plane flying away, and Nick lookin in his locket at a pic of <Delete as appropriate> (Maya, Mia and Pearl/Apollo and Trucy)
Then, the end.
Just add loads more dialogue in between.

---

All I can say to the above idea is
Noooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Sorry. It would seriously depress me.



After GS5? But at the end of GS4, Apollo is still less competent than Phoenix in 1-1 practically, and I'm not Apollo-bashing, it's just kind of.. true. I don't see him eclipsing Phoenix in one game. I mean, Phoenix eclipsed Mia.

---

You never know,
Apollo may try a massivly long and complex case, that even Nick can't figure out,

And indeed, Personally, I don't want Nick to leave,
I were just setting the scene for when I assume he will.

---

Phoenix dying? I wouldn't be happy, but I can't say I'd be suprised...

---

Well, once I has said it before, I'd say it again here: Making Phoenix become a hobo and lose his lawyer career is even worse than killing him in the game, but they've already done it. I hate what they have done to Phoenix, but I still love AJ because of the new characters and stories. If Phoenix were die in the GS5, maybe the game will lose a big fan base, but there are still a lot new players.

BTW, I don't think he will die in the GS5. he's too lucky to be murdered.

---

I am sure we will see him make a lawyer comeback, actually, in GS5.

I am sure he will take up the bar exam again and be let in to defend once more. My reasoning?

---

I don't know...personally I don't think he will become a defence again. I mean...is it really fine if he got paid by both of the clients and the government? ( I'm under an impression that the jury system is in charged by the prosecutor office, correct me if I'm wrong.)

---

Not! Lawyer Phoenix managed to overshadow the whole GS4 game. Imagine how much he'd overshadow if he's a lawyer again. So I, sadly, fear it won't happen, unless they either make him leave or, decide that Apollo isn't the only 'main' char and have some Phoenix-centic cases as well.

And this is the only 'leaving' I will tolerate.

So, would anyone object to that? You could even pretend Iris moved to Kurain, if that's your thing.

In the Phoenix-is-murdered scenario, they should have Apollo put on trial for the murder. Apollo defends himself.

---

Now that I've played 4-4 and have had some time to think about it, I'd like to see Kristoph get his revenge on Phoenix by (somehow) requesting De Killer to 'take care of him'.

Apollo will then have to task of A) Defending an innocent accused of the murder and B) Trying to prove Kristoph's guilt.

I've got an insane, dark, depressing idea revolving around Phoenix's death, but it's not just Phoenix.

NOTE: This idea is designed to fuck your mind. That is why I have nicknamed it...

"THE ULTIMATE MINDFUCK."

The victims:




An original character who was a former client of Phoenix.
An attempted murder on .

Possible defendant(s):



Someone original.

The perpetrator:

An emotionally-unhinged, almost insane, depressed teenager who's parents were murdered by the victim, who was defended by Phoenix, and prosecuted by Miles. The man was guilty, but was declared not guilty thanks to Phoenix. This completely wrecked the kid, and he kills all involved in the case in an act of vengeance. When finally cornered by Apollo, and his guilt realized, he pulls a Dahlia, and loses it, with a special "NOOOOOOO!" sound-bit, and passes out.

The thing is, after Apollo gets his defendant declared not guilty, and after the whole trial, everyone finds out, that, in the kid's trial, he was declared not guilty due to insanity.

But it doesn't end there.

In the next game, in the last case, the defendant is the teenager, except he's taking therapy, medication, and was just recently released from a mental hospital. He's not guilty, this time, and he's of sound mind. This introduces a moral decision of epic proportions.

Do you avenge Phoenix and everyone else, and throw the trial, landing the homicidal kid in jail, or do you preserve justice, and have him declared not guilty, as he truly is?

What do you think of this idea?

Do you have to kill off ? Why not ema?

Because it's designed to break your heart, and people like Gumshoe more than Ema.

I just wish they bumped Phoenix out of the picture and focus more on Apollo. I have seen enough of him and after reading a few posts mention that the series is mainly about phoenix, it only makes me more depressed that it is true. I know everything about him and I need to see some refeshing character development, something new, something different and Apollo is the one to provide that. They just need to focus more on him while moving Phoenix out of the way in what ever manner possible. He needs to move on.

---

Wow, this discussion is still going on. Awesome.

I already covered a lot of things early on, though I believe I forgot to respond to a few points directed at me. Perhaps I'll cover them as I throw in my discussion.

I see a lot of people who are unhappy with Phoenix's change into Magic Hobo, and dislike the idea of him becoming corrupted. To be honest, I loved the way they changed Phoenix because I felt like they gave him greater depth as a character. His transformation into a more cunning and subversive figure over his youthful idealism, while still maintaining his drives and sense of Justice. I felt that his personality made sense given his motives and experience. I tend to dislike the concept of a sacrosanct character, because I feel that fictional figures should be resculpted by the world around them, rather than just shaping it to themselves.

I once again state that Phoenix is very close to what Damon Gant became, and has taken a few steps down the same path. Gant is a double to Phoenix in their pursuit of Justice and their position as underdog, as well as their antagonistic relationship to the legal system. Both are exemplary legal figures, Phoenix a legendary lawyer and Gant a mythical detective. Like Phoenix, Gant desired to bring out the truth - while Phoenix focused on absolving the innocent, Gant was dedicated to punishing the guilty. Both were crippled by the very system they represented - both found justice undone by the rigid demand for decisive, unchallengable evidence, regardless of any other indicator's of the person's guilt. Both were pushed to defy the system in order to ensure justice was done, by forging evidence in order to fulfill the court's condition of decisive proof and implicate a figure that was clearly indicated as guilty by all evidence. Finally, both sought to manipulate the system in order to correct the problems they saw, albeit differently.

The major difference which makes Gant into Phoenix's darker counterpart is that that Gant both solves the problem of the system and embodies it. He creates the evidence that ensures the guilty man, a murderer, is put away, but commits a murder in order to do so. Gant uses his crime to control the system through blackmail, and maintains law through the use of lawlessness. He changes the system into a parody of its ideal in order to maintain the ideal (Dualism, much?) Gant is a Gothic double to Phoenix, who suffers the same challenges in GS4. Gant reveals a solution to the problem, but at the price of violating the ethics of law.

I think that Phoenix comes a lot closer to this than may be expected. He implicates Kristoph with false evidence, as Gant does. The difference is that the evidence is to replace real evidence that should be there, and that Phoenix did not sacrifice those present. In fact, he effectively saves Olga from implication, as a stark contrast to Gant's implication of Ema in the murder. He subverted the system as Gant did, but has attempted to uphold ethics rather than cast them aside. Still, he has taken control of the law through his Mason System, and his machinations give him a startling degree of power over it - perhaps as much power as Gant would have, if he desired it.

It can be debated whether Phoenix is capable of becoming Gant. He has a different methodology, but he is also younger - Gant's history is never elaborated upon other than the rigors of the law drove him to believe that only total control of the law could allow him to fight crime. Who knows what age will change in Phoenix, and if he will decide that he must take control of the entire law in order to do it. Unable to see what he will do, it's impossible to make that call either way. However, he is in a position, as the creator and the apparantly sole director of the Mason System's design, to wield an immense degree of power.

It is possible that Phoenix may be forced off of the spotlight by his position of power. He could, due to his involvement with the enforcement of law rather than the defense of clients, become a prosecutor or a detective. He has the skills for both, and either would reflect his apparant current leaning. They would also allow him to take on a less prominent role, appearing in the background to assist in a case or two (and if he's a prosecutor, he could make a major appearance in the final case...).

It is also possible that his position in the formation and establisment of the new Jurist System could make him a target for others. Lawyers, cops, and criminals who feel that the new system hampers them or that they can control it might be gunning for him or his family. This may force him to go underground to protect his loved ones (in association with a final case?). Personally, I would feel it more interesting if such a thing were the result of his apparant death, and that the final case reveals a plot to use the Jurist System to control the courts. This would also bring up memories of Damon Gant, especially if some evidence points to Phoenix using his influence for some suspect maneuvering. It would also heighten the emotional impact, particularly for Apollo and Ema.

This is what came to my head, based on the discussions people have had so far.

---

A murder and accusing an innocent of murder violates more than the ethics of law...

The MASON System was some weird plot telling device, as real as those buttons you press onscreen with your stylus. It was not Phoenix's literal presentation to the jury or the new jurist system. The only part where Phoenix is speaking to the Jury is when he asks them to select the final verdict.

Seriously, can we imagine Phoenix having the skills to create such an overwhelming computer simulation? It was some weird plot device by the creators, [and this type of misinterpretation is one of the reasons it either shouldn't have been there or been explained better.]

Why exactly do you want Phoenix to be corrupted into the Gantish arch-enemy of GS5/6? I'm curious.

---

That's not particularly relevant to my point, and its presence doesn't invalidate anything. Committing a crime in order to combat crime is paradoxical, violating the very institution it seeks to maintain. The severity of Gant's crimes only further supports the violation of ethics, and the emotional emphasis strengthens the Gothic paradox's contrasts.



Phoenix is credited with creating and organizing the Jurist system. The Mason System is the game's method of portraying it to the player, and any cumbersome mechanic in that area does not invalidate the Jurist System as it is in-universe. That I chose to refer to it as the Mason System rather than the Jurist System doesn't change the story statement that Phoenix Wright created and organized the current system.

My point was that Phoenix, as creator and enactor of the Jurist System, has significant power over it. It is stated that he was the man 'responsible' for the Jurist System. Whatever term I used for this doesn't suddenly invalidate that.



Why not? It's not such a stretch of imagination that he would have access to the resources necessary to create such a device. Also, it clearly represents information given the jury in the game, so its an Occam's Razor inference that the Jurist System and the body of evidence is represented in the Mason System, even if the system itself has some problems in terms of game mechanics.

I don't really see how game mechanics can be used to define story parameters if the story itself does not acknowledge that. At the worst, it's a bad decision on the part of the game programmers and does not immediately invalidate the story itself. That's like saying a chapter of a story does not exist within the story itself because the syntax used to convey it is cumbersome. It may make it a poorly written book, but it does not suddenly erase the chapter from the book as a whole.



Well, it would be interesting and especially shocking character development for both Phoenix and those around him, were it to happen. And really, there could be reason for him to reach such a state, both for tragedy and to play in the recurring themes of the legal system's rigours. However, it was only one possibility I suggested as being possible.

I didn't actually say I wanted this exclusively; I said that I would find it interesting if Phoneix were to push the envelope regarding what is right or wrong in the pursuit of truth. This could lead him to a villainous role, but could also reach a middle-ground, having him stop short of outright wrongdoing or be pulled back by his friends. It could even only appear that way as a ploy by Phoenix, or a misinterpretation, although this would be a lot less interesting if Phoenix actually had a crisis of conscience between what is ethical and what is necessary to bring out the truth. I did mention numerous times that it was only a possiblity, and that the appeal came from the challenge to the norm that they presented.

I happen to like Gothic conventions, where the protagonist comes close to becoming his enemy and vice versa. Clean-cut morality bores me, and having a character never reach situations where he skirts the line between good and evil (for want of better terms) makes them terribly one-sided. As I said, I loved the changes to Phoenix because they pushed the boundaries of his morality and drives and challenged his boundaries of positive and negative. They did the same thing with Edgeworth and even with Gant to some degree, where there is that ambiguity lurking behind their assigned story roles. The idea that Phoenix could have forged evidence and fell from grace by his own choice, perhaps in order to save a client he knew was innocent, made it more enjoyable because it made you wonder what the circumstances that lead to it were and if they were as they seemed. Even though they weren't, it still made the suggestion and still challenged the clean-cut nature of law/criminal and what 'truth' is. The fourth game challenged the standard GS themes, and I thought they did it in an interesting and entertaining way.

While GS isn't Gothic and doesn't actually use full Gothic conventions, it does deal with mystery and ambiguity, which deals with a similar liminality and amorphous, quasi-hidden 'truth'. Having the characters change and be challanged enhances this, much as when a cop is vexed and tempted by the crime he fights in crime dramas.

---

(from another thread)


Wow! You posted that idea first, icer, but I swear this was the first time I was in this thread! Of course, you said Apollo should defend himself, but having the same basic idea is crazy!!



Anyway, in the other thread, I also said that I actually wouldn't have any problems with Phoenix dying...as long as it was the last case in GS(X) and GS(X+1) had no characters carry over from GS(X). That way we get the emotional epicness of Phoenix dying, but we don't have to endure the torture of having to live through games with Phoenix dead. (After all, if no characters carried over to GS(X+1), we wouldn't see him there whether he were alive or dead.)

---

Huh? That's even worse, having to take away Phoenix's death as our enduring memory of the arc. It's not epic. It's just depressing. It would be still worse if he was murdered after first having been broken and corrupted by the horrors of society. Sure, it regularly happens to real people, but this is a game. It's supposed to be somewhat enjoyable.


No. Phoenix organises the jury trial. Not the jurist system as a whole. There's a fundamental difference here. Phoenix appears to be employed to choose a trial, the jurists watch the court action on TV screens [we are told]. Whoever is organising at a systems level or deciding to have a jurist trial in the first place is someone higher up. Fine, Phoenix seems to have been able to rig at least one of the actual jurists, though I doubt he'd be able to continue this practice if juries became a standardised thing. Phoenix is running the implementation of the details of a particular jurist trial, not the jurist system as a whole and not its design. There's no indication the MASON System time travel stuff is ever shown to the jury. It happens before the trial even begins and then we get Apollo, like he's just found out all that stuff [Phoenix has told him].

Your Gantish corruption idea would have been more interesting if Kristoph had stayed Apollo's mentor, and Apollo got similarly corrupted, [but eventually had some kind of revelation?] *gets hit with a blunt object*

---

The last case should be named "Turnabout Attorney." This is where HoboWright is thought to be dead after being pushed into a river by Edgeworth and his body is never found. Maya comes back into the picture as a successful spirit medium/fast food chain millionaire. Maya's devastated and tries to channel HoboWright but it doesn't work. Thinking her failure was due to her devastation, she gives up. After some investigation on the case, it is brought to court. And then the usual turnabouts happen and the case is brought to the third and final day where HoboWright suddenly appears and Edgeworth is found possessed by Damon Gant who died 6 years after Rise of the Ashes.

Don't forget Franny, Godot, and Mia (channeled by Pearl) are all witnesses!

---

When I played the first three games, I really identified with Phoenix. They don't tell you much about him as a character so different types of people can imagine themselves in the first-person role of Phoenix. It worked really well for me. I thought of the defendents as MY clients, I had a crush on Edgeworth, Maya was MY assistant. It was a little traumatic to see that I gone from a badass lawyer to a slob who didn't shave in Apollo Justice.

I still kind of think of myself as Phoenix Wright, so it would be totally traumatic if they killed him off. Like they were killing off a part of me. NOOOOO, I'M DEAD!!

---

brb, exploding from the awesome.

In any case, I think killing off Phoenix would be a really cheap shot. I mean, as a practical approach, the guy's thirty-three! He's too young to die! You could argue the same for the rest of the murder victims, but only one of them really carried any significance, and that was Mia. It's been stated many times before that she never truly 'died' in essence, since you could still talk to her. If Phoenix died, that'd be it. No more. No more of his wit or humor. Capcom would leave a very weepy audience behind, and while that it sometimes a good thing it isn't in this case. In fiction, some deaths have you saying, 'Well, it was inevitable.' Others have you sad, but at the same time oddly satisfied. Either way, well executed deaths fast track the plot and move it along. Killing Phoenix would not produce this effect.

I agree that the new characters need more development, and that's why I think that if they intend to make Phoenix a playable character just split the series in two. There's already three camps in this fandom anyway: The pro-AJ one where they want the new characters to have the limelight, the pro-PW one where they want the old-school characters to return and for Phoenix to be playable, and the ever present neutral camp. Now explain to me how we're going to make ANY of these people happy by killing off the most beloved figure in the series (and I say that with confidence).

---

Phoenix mentions his secret project as being 'seven years in the making', suggesting that he's been working towards it for a long time. We've already been shown that he's good at manipulating trials and investigations over long periods of time. I don't think it's a stretch to assume that he has a great degree of influence on the Jurist System organization if he can choose the trial that will launch the new system, and to organize the jury so that one of them is a specific person.

We don't actually know anything about the structure of the committee, other than Phoenix is a member as set up the entire first trial as the system by which the Jury did its duty. Phoenix is always referred to as the prominent figure regarding the Jurist System; his name is associated with it by everyone in the game who mentions it, or at least the vast majority of them. While this isn't evidence that he's the prime mover of it, it does show that he can personally manipulate the structure of a trial. I think it's a bit short-sighted to assume that he won't be able to do it again, particularly given the reputation he's gained from being the prominent instigator of the Jurist System.

The jury system was shown successful in its first trial, circumventing the crippling loophole the courts had acknowledged, and had down so in a trial that had absolved Phoenix of the major sin attributed to him. The prestige will give him a lot of sway within the court system, particularly regarding jury practices. If he keeps using it talents to help the system along, it can become firmly established, and he along with it. There's no reason to believe he won't do this, since his major goal was to reform the legal system that had wronged him, and he'll want to be sure it'll stick. He won't necessarily do it for personal fame, although he may consider that a factor to getting him the ability to help the system along. This could lead into the corruption angle, if he felt he needed to skew the law further and further to get to the truth, but that's another argument altogether.

Regardless of whether or not he's the head of the comittee or entirely responsble for it, he's the one who shepherded it along and put it on the map. Given he's been working towards it for quite some time and worked to get it implemented, his name is going to be associated with it and it's not too much to say that he'll have a great degree of influence within it, particularly if he continues to lend his support to it.



That would certainly have been interesting. Apollo's tabula rasa innocence seemed to lend itself to a mentor-figure, and having him shaped by Kristoph into someone unscrupulous, and then brought around by someone like Trucy, would be entertaining.

I don't agree that it's more interesting than Phoenix, however, because Phoenix has a lot of backstory and baggage that lends itself to challenges of morality, and having him steadily change over time gives more gravitas to the change. Phoenix's history makes the potential to fall more powerful, story-wise.

---

*just walked into this thread*

The concept of Phoenix dying? It might be good for the series (change focus), but I have a feeling that it would come off as an emotionally conflicted, confusing, and tragic tale like 2-4 did. I have a confession: I never liked 2-4 that much. Sure, it's a great story of character development, but it's extremely odd to play, given...

---

So... to all those people who want to kill Phoenix: why? This is not a rhetorical question. I want some explanation as to why this would actually be useful or compelling for the series other than 'it will get rid of him' or 'it will be dramatic'.



Sounds like the project is actually his plan to finally get Kristoph charged with the evidence forging, and clear his own name. He hasn't been spending 7 years trying to implement jury trials.



Since the game has a policy of never mentioning by name anyone we don't meet onscreen. I agree that Phoenix's higher-up is probably someone like Edgeworth, who will give him some measure of leeway, but I don't think he'd agree to serious corruption, especially now the goal of clearing Phoenix's name is accomplished.



Sounds like it would have made a far more interesting GS4. Anyway...


Powerful = Completely and utterly depressing.

One of the things I liked about the original trilogy was that despite the gross injustice, evil and corruption in the world, justice could triumph, via the continued belief of Phoenix that there was some good in humanity [belief in his innocent client] and the bonds of friendship could sometimes overcome the injustice and corruption of the society. The mutual trust between Edgeworth and Phoenix allows them to take down the corrupt Gant regime. Redd White may murder Mia, but even this is not enough to break the bond between her and Maya, and by virtue of Phoenix he finally is jailed. Edgeworth may be corrupted into a 'Demon Prosecutor' by von Karma, but Phoenix's unwavering belief in the good still in him allows him to 'save' Edgeworth and prove him innocent. The bond between Phoenix and Maya allows the plots to murder her to be thwarted and Engarde to be put away.

It's unreasonable to expect the new arc to follow these same themes, I guess, but to change the arc's theme to pretty much the opposite by displaying the tragic corruption of Phoenix by society seems somewhat redundant.

---

I completely agree with you on the first paragraph. But I don't think that it's unreasonable to assume the same for the Apollo arc. Everything you said was always what I counted as the hallmarks of the series as a whole, not just of the Phoenix arc. Going against what they built in the first three games for the new protagonist would be a huge mistake.

I, too, want to know how killing Phoenix could possibly make the series better. The only things that could come of it would be dramatic effect, adding a single facet to Trucy's character, and maybe through some obscure reason making Apollo a better lawyer. I wish they wouldn't, but there are better ways to get rid of Phoenix than to kill him.

---

I've already explained this at least once in the thread beyond those two points, but I'll summarize.

Phoenix's death, actual or fabricated, would be used to illustrate the conflict between justice and criminality. Phoenix is an icon of justice in-universe, and to kill him is to create a metaphor for the fragility of justice against chaos, and the need to weather constant attack. Phoenix's friend would reel from such an attack, not just because of Phoenix's death but because it shows that justice is not sacrosanct, and must continuously fight against such criminality. It would bring out all of the themes of Phoenix Wright and challenge them - it would be a microcosm for the series as a whole. Further it would force the series to re-evaluate itself and its structure, putting more emphasis on the other character's roles and, more importantly, shaking them (recall my earlier posts on the temptation for Ema to fabricate evidence to implicate their suspect, or Apollo's conflict between defending is client and getting justice for Phoenix).

It would really put the entire series into perspective, foregrounding its challenges and that the criminal chaos is an actual threat to law, rather than just something to be casually brushed aside. Rather than the internal strife of GS4, it would show outward conflict.

That's not to say that it can't also so the internal problems - those would come up as well as an evaluation of the legal system in contrast to crime, and where the legal system sometimes skirts the line to maintain this balance. But that's getting into the 'corruption' side, and that's a different story.



Implementing the jury system is part of that, though, because his name was tarnished due to a fundamental flaw in the legal system. It was a flaw that he'd also had experience with before (the Lana Skye case, and Matt Enguarde's case in a limited sense). Establishing a jury would destroy the very flaw that Kristoph based his entire prestige and power around, and would prevent the circumstances of Phoenix's fall from happening again.



It's not something to be taken lightly, but it's within the realm of possibility. If its a subtlely escalating degrees of manipulation, it might not be seen right away and will prompt an intervention or discreet investigation (Edgeworth or someone else secretly looking into it). That would lend itself better to the idea of a gradual erring, and would be more believable than a blatantly unethical action.



And that's still there. There's Apollo and Gavin, as well as Trucy, and they fill the roles that Phoenix and Edgeworth and Maya once occupied, in a different way.

If Phoenix were to slide into a gradual corruption, it would show the dangers that the constant fight against injustice and evil has to erode those values. The Damon Gant situation already touched on this, with Gant implied to have degraded into a sociopathic killer in order to uphold justice. The fight against crime requires that people push their laws in order to deal with threats that circumvent those laws, to challenge a system that needs to change with what it fights. Phoenix, in fighting internal and external threats and seeing the cracks in the law, has the temptation to take actions that violate ethics in order to uphold the greater justice. This can lead to actions that are unthinkable to some, and in the eyes of the current law, monstrous.

If he were to take such a role, it would be extremely similar than Edgeworth's fall in GS1. Apollo and Trucy would take the role of Phoenix and Maya, with Phoenix in Edgeworth's position, falling towards unscrupulous practices. Apollo and Trucy would probably take it on themselves, upon seeing that, to pull him back, as would many others - its not necessarily given that he will, if he feels that he's furthering true justice in the only way possible. The struggle between redemption and the fall is what's important, because it provides a challenge to the ideals of justice and truth and their eventual victory.

If I recall, that's actually the point of the Phoenix Wright series - to challenge the dominance of truth and justice and to show the conflict they endure. Phoenix being corrupted becomes a cautionary tale, showing that the avatar of truth and justice can become corrupted in the right circumstances. Whether he's redeemed, pulled back or destroyed, it sends the message and puts the ball in Apollo's court to fight the virtuous fight (which is what a lot of people want: to have Apollo take over as the protagonist entirely).

I don't understand why Phoenix has to always be this inviolate symbol, anyway. Isn't it better to develop a character over time, changing their role and challenging their original design with different twists and permutations? Even the series creators decided that Phoenix would be more interesting if he changed from his original role, seeing the need to put a new protagonist and cast into the part of the conflict of justice (Pun is intended). I think the changes to Phoenix are positive, and represent the series exploring new avenues of the themes rather than retreading the same ground the exact same way.

---

Can you please rehash for me, since I don't have time to reread the entire topic - this is your desired scenario for GS5 rather than some prediction based on the premonitions in 1-5 and Gant telling Edgeworth about how he'll also slide into corruption? [The irony being it was actually Phoenix in your scenario].



Edgeworth's 'fall' had already occurred pre-game. In the trilogy, all except the arch-enemies show positive development throughout the series, particularly the formerly-corrupted Edgeworth, Franziska and Godot. It's a positive message on recovery from society/evil's corruption.

So poor Phoenix is going to become some tragic symbolic sacrifice in the series' reversal [turnabout, how ironic] from its roots?

It would put the entire trilogy into perspective, as 'the miracle never happen.'

Criminal chaos is a threat to law? How is this 'criminal chaos' defined?



That's 'getting rid of Phoenix so we can focus on Apollo since we can't seem to otherwise'


There's a difference between changing and evolving a character over time, and regressing them into a corrupted, negative state. I would find it utterly reprehensible if the producer chose to slaughter Phoenix in this manner. So that type of thing happens in real life - I don't want or need some video game to remind me of that. I believe people liked the positive nature of the trilogy and that's why people play those games and like those stories. If we actually want to see the utter depression of good people being broken and corrupted, we merely have to look in the real world.

Oh - and all that symbolism would go right over 99% of players' heads. Phoenix would be murdered/character assassinated in vain.


The positive themes of the trilogy - I really don't see them in GS4 with Apollo, Klavier and Trucy.

Even at the end of game 4, there's still overwhelming negativity. Apollo's mother and sister are found, but apparently his mother doesn't love him enough to permit him to know about it. Much as Trucy parrots in the end credits about him feeling like her 'brother', I detected only a very limited friendly bond developing during the games. It's as if they have specified a genetic bond to compensate for the stark lack of the intense friendship bond that developed between Phoenix and Maya as early as the end of 1-4. Klavier seems to have not personally grown at all from the revelations in 4-4, not appearing to care about the revelation that Kristoph is a mass-murderer or the specifics of his plot to ruin Phoenix, merely whining selfishly about how unfair Kristoph was to him as he expected a fair contest, 'brother to brother.'

An idea of a hypothetical law game illustrating the concepts you have outlined is a very good idea - but I don't think it's a good idea for this series or this character. People liked the positive themes and friendship bonds central to games 1-3, they're part of the reason the games were such a success.

Your depressing themes of Phoenix's corruption and death wouldn't merely make the new arc have different themes - they would effectively negate much of what people enjoyed about the original trilogy. Many people don't like GS4 due to the partial negation of many of the elements they found satisfying in games 1-3. This scenario would carry that negation to extremes.

I don't think destroying Phoenix would convey your themes very well to the audience. Take for example some other effective media portrayals of an individual being corrupted or destroyed by a corrupt society, for example, the book 1984 [or for that matter, Animal Farm]. These books are effective because they are written in such a way that the reader never feels emotional attachment to the [eventually destroyed] protagonist. They're just a pawn in the writer's demonstration [ooh, Apollo *shot*..], and the lack of emotional attachment means their demise does not distract from the writers' comment on society they have demonstrated.

Now, the effectiveness of game 1-3 partially hinged on that amazing story-telling actually making us emotionally attached to the characters. So, if Phoenix is murdered or corrupted, most players will have a severe emotional response. In their sorrow or anger, they will be completely and utterly oblivious to any inherent symbolism and whatever comment it should have been making will bypass them entirely. Thus Phoenix is sacrificed in vain.

As I said, the themes would be interesting in some other game, [or with that 'Apollo corrupted by Kristoph' idea, since we hadn't had his previous development, it would not have been depressing, and he could have found redemption by the end of the game and been a popular and interesting character like Edgeworth.] But I think it would be an extremely bad direction for this particular series.

---

It would be great if the final case actually WAS called "Turnabout Nightmare" - maybe Apollo has a dream when a miurder occurs, and when the case takes place the events of the case mirror what happened in his dream.
No thats a cack idea....

---

There is one way to keep Phoenix alive, in character, while concentrating the attention on Apollo without having to resort to putting Phoenix on a bus:

Create a contrast between the two characters' ideologies, to the extent where they can no longer cooperate with each other. Let the final case be the breaking point between the two.

Now, this doesn't mean that the divide would come from negative feelings, but instead the differences on what they believe a defense attorney should be eventually makes Apollo want to splinter off and pursue his own goals. It'll allow Apollo to be on his own as a lawyer and as a character.

Granted, this means that Apollo will have a show something about himself that we really don't know about, but considering that we know nothing about Apollo anyway, it honestly can't hurt his characterization. It might even add to it, and give the series a new theme to aim for.

Personally, I believe that this can be accomplished without having too much attention focused upon Phoenix during the next game. Give the kid a backstory and an actual rival to really showcase his motivations, while having him start to break away from Phoenix's help and advice. Maybe even get Apollo to realize that what Phoenix wants isn't necessarily what he needs to do.

Last edited by InsaneZero on Sun Aug 03, 2008 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If Phoenix dies, it would be really disappointing especially that he basically completes the circle of the game, even if he's not the main character.

I'm fine with the idea of Phoenix dying at the first case and opening for a possibility of him actually being alive, then returning back to the last case that ties all of the cases together.

I think what Capcom should do though is make him a defense attorney again, or better yet him, becoming a prosecutor! Haha.

---

I don't want Phoenix to die - he can't die. Even his name suggests immortality, you know a Phoenix rising from the ashes an' all... maybe he could go missing and everyone THINKS he's dead?

---

This might be interesting, actually. That kind of contrast could lead to some really good interplay in the later cases.


Yes, I'm aware there was something else here. I pressed the wrong button. Doublepost coming with what I was originally going to post.

---

I know the response is late and that I probably won't get one back, but I felt like responding for the fun of it. Besides, I positively adore this topic.



I've never said anything other than this would be something I'd like to see and I'd think would work well with the material already presented. I don't presume to make predictions for what Capcom does next, because I'm not Capcom and don't know what direction they want to take the game.



Phoenix Wright has always been about lawlessness and the fight against it, and this includes corrupt legal officials. Fallen characters do exist, though we generally don't see their fall, but their recovery. Phoenix himself recovered from a false charge, a fallen state.

And just because Phoenix would move towards corruption doesn't mean he has to end there. As you said, redemption is a major device and he has plenty of people around him to pull in the opposite direction. This wouldn't even be a repetition of GS4, since it would more likely be corruption in pursuit of the truth rather than victory (a kind of vigilantism in the name of justice rather than for personal glory, like most of the villains).



Criminality as chaos. Order vs. Chaos, Law vs. Criminality. The two terms are synonymous in this tense; I was using hyperbole.



Which doesn't invalidate anything I've said about it being a cautionary tale and and a reevalution (and possible reimagining) or the series themes. Quite frankly, it sounds like nitpicking if you're trying to discredit my entire argument based on two sentences that merely sum up a secondary point (which I felt necessary to say.)

Besides, it's not even getting rid of Phoenix. He's still around, and can still funtion in the story at the same degree with the events I suggested. All it does is give Apollo more credence as saving Phoenix, making him more independent.



Did you just say that Phoenix Wright fans are stupid?

I don't accept that. People pick up on a lot of symbolism, and the GS games have been fairly detailed when it comes to symbolism and character detail. I don't really see Phoenix developing some ambiguity will do any damage to the series as a whole.

And I think there's a lot of negativity in the PH series. A lot of important people die, and that death isn't trivialized. Mia Fey's death was handled quite well, and actually felt like someone important had died. It continued to influence the story throughout the games, even despite her returning in the form of a channeled spirit. GS4 was even heavier than the previous series, which I will admit people complained about - however, they maintained their feeling of redemption and their positivity despite that.

I'm not sure how you couldn't maintain positivity in a game where Phoenix's ethics become subtley, especially after a game where he appeared to have violated all of his ethics blatantly. Especially since I was quick to suggest redemption.



It's a lot darker than the other games, sure, but it also seems to be building up to something more than the other one's were. Trucy has her issues, but she also represents perserverence, surviving loss and abandonment. Klavier represents a good person correcting their past mistakes, redeeming himself for the part he played in a great injustice. Apollo is young and naive, but he's persistant even though he's got flaws that trouble him. He's not as good of a lawyer as Phoenix was, and he's always trying to fight past that - once again, perserverence.

The big thing was that there was a lot of suggestion leading into the next game, and a lot of the redemptive potential was implied rather than actualized. I think that's just as effective, because it means that the issues that plague Apollo and Trucy will most likely come to a head and be overcome. It was much less self-contained than the last games, and seems to be more of a long-running story.



I don't think they've been negated so much as challenged. The old series had immaculate protagonists who were facing off against corrupted foes, either redeeming them or bringing them down. Now, the protagonists themselves are flawed, and have to overcome themselves as their enemies. GS 1,2, and 3 concerned the law deal with criminals; 1-5 and GS4 concern the law dealing with itself.

In fact, Phoenix dying would be more like the original trilogy than the Apollo Justice themes were, because it would seem like the law is against a criminal once again. It could be done as an enemy from within, with the killing leading back to enemies within the legal system (such as those who want to cripple the Jurist System), but it suggests something directly opposed to law. The corruption aspect is definitely internal, unless you want to make Phoenix wholly corrupt and criminal himself, and that's taking it a little far. Having him do sketchy things in persuing truth and saving innocents is more in touch with his character and more effective in maintaining a sense of empathy to him.

Also, I've never claimed that both must happen absolutely. I've discussed the benefits of his death and the benefits of challenging his ethics, but never tried to claim that both need to happen to be effective. I've suggested different degrees of both, and conceded that certain aspects of it are less effective and downright inappropriate for the game's themes.



Noted. Although having Phoenix as the ambiguous victim (that is, where it's not entirely clear that he's actually dead) would get people to pay attention, and have them more emotionally involved with the case as a whole and empathic to the other character's reactions. He could even wind up dead at the end of it all, and maintain this emotional weight - perhaps if the trial proves that he was not actually corrupt and was fighting for justice, and he's never actually found, dead or alive).

I disagree that emotional response detracts from the message in all cases, and that a protagonist who is destroyed has to have no emotional connectability to the readers in order to be effectively destroyed. Animal Farm is a misleading example because it's too different from Phoenix Wright or what I'm proposing to be used. I'm not proposing that law be revealed as utterly corrupt, but that law has the potential to become monstrous in its pursuit without constant vigilance. Animal Farm was more 'inevitable', speaking more of the failings of communism to overcome the selfishness of human nature. What I suggest isn't an inevitablility, but merely a possibility.

Would it be better if Phoenix's death and corruption were only rumoured, with the evidence in a constant state of flux? For example, evidence keeps appearing suggesting he was doing shady things in the pursuit of justice, but they keep having doubt thrown on them or getting counteracted?

---